Re: composing messages with x-label
* On 2007.01.11, in <20070111160325.GA15402@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
* "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A colleague's request triggered me into concocting this one
> quickly... Not in the CVS at this point; comments welcome.
I see X-Label: primarily as a receiver-side feature, not a sender
feature. Still, that's just a policy matter. There's no technology
barrier to using it as a sender feature (you can pipe X-Labels: into
an SMTP submission agent), so adding X-Label to the compose menu just
makes it easier to do what you can do anyway. If I don't want to
receive labels from others I must filter them out during the message
transfer, in either case. No complaint about the feature, just noting
its properties.
Is there still an objection to
http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/sw/mutt/patch-1.5.11.dgc.xlabel_ext.8
or
http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/sw/mutt/patch-1.5.11.dgc.xlabel_sort.1
?
xlabel_ext allows editing labels at any time, rather than jointly
with composition. Past objection to this has been that edit-message
is sufficient for editing labels, but xlabel_ext, like the X-label
composition patch, simply makes it substantially easier to do what you
already can do.
xlabel_sort allows sorting the index by labels.
It seems useful to me to apply these alongside your composition patch,
as they are joint functionality.
--
-D. dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx NSIT University of Chicago